America: Land of the Lawless and Home of the Dependent

There appear to be no limits to the attempts by Barack Obama and his fascist-oriented administration to subvert and destroy the principles on which our country has flourished.  And just as disturbing are the actions of elected officials and a preponderance of the ”national” media that support (actively or passively) these never-ending atrocities – not to mention the lack of public outrage.

My, my ….. where to begin?

Well, let’s see.  How about the New Black Panthers, who not only were captured of film intimidating voters at a recent election with an open display of weaponry and verbal harassment, but now also have incited vigilante justice by circulating posters offering a $10,000 reward for the “capture, DEAD OR ALIVE” of George Zimmerman, the purported Neighborhood Watch observer who was involved in the fatal shooting of a black teenager in Florida.  So many illegal acts involved in just these two instances, from election interference to conspiracy revolving around kidnapping and/or potential murder.  So what happens?  A federal investigative team from Eric Holder’s Department of Injustice is dispatched to Florida to ascertain whether or not a “hate crime” was perpetrated against the deceased.  Aggravated voter intimidation?  Buried by the same Mr. Holder, with  no action taken.

There are so many instances of Obama’s confidants/supporters/administrators engaging in avoidance or defiance of the laws that govern the rest of us serfs that it would be unreasonable to expect my readers to plod through an exhaustive list, but here are a few high-profile additional examples that will help set the tone.

Warren Buffet, the multi-billionaire who is endlessly touted by the President as someone who is openly in favor of “paying one’s fair share”, but is currently embroiled in a suit concerning unpaid taxes initiated by the IRS.

Or Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s failure to pay required taxes for several years, but nevertheless was appointed to the post that regulates the enforcement of tax laws.

And, of course, Obama himself, who, with the help of a then Democratic-heavy Congress featuring Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, rammed through legislation resulting in a highly suspect and arguably unconstitutional government intrusion into personal freedoms regarding commerce.  And now this “constitutional law professor” (who taught one narrowly focused, one very specific, issue-related course at the University of Chicago School of Law) has stated that the Supreme Court does not have the authority to overturn decisions made by “the elected majority”.  Patently untrue.

But fall in line, serfs; the King has spoken.

One might question the integrity and intelligence – let alone competence – of a “leader” who performs and countenances such blatant disregard for the rule of law, let alone the constant barrage of divisive rhetoric that characterizes his speeches as the nation approaches national elections scheduled for this fall, unless one is willing to recognize the fact that his actions fit perfectly into his plans to remake America into the mode of socialist European progressivism.

A large part of that plan is the implementation of statism that will ensure the dependency of the public upon the rewards of the “rights” that can be determined only by the government.  Forget about the God-given rights explicitly referred to in our Bill of Rights and Constitution (those pesky documents again – everyone knows that they are outdated and irrelevant in our modern, secular society).  No, we are to be directed by the inspired concepts divined by the King (whoops, President) and his loyal (and lavishly rewarded) minions whose enlightened sense of decency and equality will dictate that the sexual propensities of a 30-year old law student (and long time feminist activist) will be supported by the general public to the tune of $3,000 a year – that’s approximately $8 a day – for birth control products.

You know, I would have a really hard time making this stuff up.  It would hardly be a good fictional read and unbelievable if presented to a reader of two decades ago.

Are you interested in a preview of what an Obama second term will guarantee?  Review the article “Generation Twit: Revenge of the Professional Left” to be found in the March edition of The American Spectator and attend the predictions of Alexis de Tocqueville, who warned “of a new despotism that would (supposedly) relieve citizens of the ‘trouble of thinking and the pain of living’, (whereby) in subsuming themselves in the collective, they would bring about a new kind of despotism in the name of equality.”

And, again from de Tocqueville: “Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number.  Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality.  But mark the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude”.

Obama and his cohorts have big plans for America.  If you plan to vote for him in November, be prepared to line up and take a number and keep in mind the words written by another author, George Orwell:  “all animals are equal, but animals are more equal than others” (Animal Farm, August, 1945).

Smoke and Mirrors

Despite all of the hooraw over the move by the White House to raise the debt limit, the result was both predictable and disappointing.

Republicans insisted that, given the reality that they control “only one-third of government” (the House, purportedly), they drove an acceptable bargain in gaining “spending cuts” to offset the impending borrowing of additional money that we don’t have to fuel the voracious conflagration of irresponsible government fiscal policies as practiced by Obama Hood and his band of thieves who halfheartedly attempt to justify their targeted redistribution of wealth as stimulus to the economy.

Bull!

As usual, these “cuts” are nothing more than reductions in planned increases to fund (waste) additional money on programs that continually teeter on the verge of collapse because the influx of taxpayer wealth always fails to provide any economic return, but in addition shows no measurable improvements of any kind.  Therefore no debt reduction is achieved – instead our indebtedness grows while the nation’s integral wealth based on productivity deteriorates.

Can I make it any more plain?  There are no savings realized from the recent compromise agreed to by Republicans.  The only victory – if the term is even remotely accurate – is that the merry men of Washington Wood don’t get to spend as much as they had planned.  At least not today.

Obama’s newly-promised (yet again!) plan to improve the economy and provide jobs is already being reported to hinge on additional “stimulus” spending to “invest” in infrastructure, etc.  More “shovel ready” jobs for the beleaguered unemployed.  Remember how well that played out the last time?  A few new jobs, each costing in the hundreds of thousands of dollars each, and massive amounts of money allocated to “saving” the jobs of such Obama backers as unions and/or government employees not to mention his supporters in the financial world.

Once again, we are privileged to endure a prolonged and vociferous hosing of the segment of the public who continues to support the Lords of Washington.

This will continue until the voters wake up to the fact that term limits are but the beginning of the solution to the massive problems that, left unchecked, will surely result in the destruction of not only America but also the world economy.

You don’t think so?  Hang on until the economic disasters caused by Obamacare begin to mount.

Now more than ever the Tea Party must continue to coalesce and expand its influence on the craven Washington establishment.

A New Look For Maine

Maine is now six months into a new administration that features a Republican Governor and Republican majorities in both components of the State Legislature.

It has been a rather rocky beginning for New Governor Paul LePage.  The media appears eager to highlight any perceived political missteps, the Democrats are furious over being relegated to minority Party status, public sector unions and their avid supporters from the entitlement class are up in arms over changes to the state government workers’ compensation and retirement programs, and the new Governor has exhibited an unsettling propensity to place his foot squarely in his mouth.

All of these roadblocks to change have likely influenced the Governor’s ability to recruit members for his leadership team, since the group of successful business people and executives that he has wooed are understandably hesitant to risk their reputations and livelihood by becoming targets for the politics of personal destruction so avidly practiced by the Democratic coalition.

Still, changes are taking place.

One of Gov. LePage’s first actions after taking the oath of office was to rescind Maine’s status as a “sanctuary state”.  This was a relief for those who were outraged by then-Gov. Baldacci’s orders to the State Police to refrain from determining the legal immigration status of any detainee.  That glaring exemption to Federal law was eventually reversed on the counsel of the State Attorney General, but such prohibitions were continued for state employees in the Welfare and other DHHS departments.  Gov. LePage’s instructions are to put an end to such practices.

With the signing of the new biennial budget, other major changes are taking place.

Heading the list are major tax improvements.  A bill featuring a reduction in Maine’s top income tax rate from 8.5 percent to 7.95 percent is also expected eliminate tax payments for 70,000 low-income Maine residents by bringing Maine’s tax laws into compliance with Federal requirements. This represents the largest tax cut in Maine history, following a seemingly never-ending period of increases throughout decades of Democratic “leadership”.

Welfare reform is also a part of the 2012-2013 budget and emphasizes that Maine will no longer be considered a welfare destination state. A new 5 year limit on welfare benefits which aligns Maine with other states and conforms to federal law will go into effect. The limit does allow for certain exemptions for hardship cases – including those involving the elderly and disabled.

Drug testing will also be implemented for welfare recipients convicted of drug crimes and those who violate welfare rules will face stricter sanctions. A first offense will result in the loss of adult benefits and a second offense may lead to termination of full family benefits.

With a badly needed change in policy, Maine residents can now look for healthcare insurance offered in other states at lower rates than offered through the only State-allowed provider, who requires some of the highest rates in the nation for those looking for health care policies.  Also, the expensive and limited availability program offered through Dirigo Health will be phased out with an end date of January 1, 2014 and legal noncitizens will no longer be eligible for MaineCare benefits as of July 1, 2011.

It is important to note that the new biennial budget comes out at a slightly larger cost ($6.3 billion) than the last and does not include,  in the words of House Speaker Robert Nutting, any ” cuts to education or programs that protect Maine’s most vulnerable.  It’s also free of gimmicks like state shutdown days.”

“It is a validation of the outstanding work done by the Appropriations Committee and of the decision by Republican legislative leaders to pursue a bipartisan two-thirds budget,” said Senate President Kevin Raye. “By affording the minority party the respect of inclusion in the budget process we were able to work through our differences and secure a thoughtful budget that honors the core principles advanced by Governor LePage,” Raye added.

Senate Majority Leader Jonathan Courtney echoed his colleagues’ sentiments. “In just 40 days the Governor gave us a document that included substantial reforms to taxes, pension and our welfare system, and this vision survived the legislative process. It helps us take a major step in moving Maine forward,” Courtney said.

These changes were not accepted without protest by the minority party and their followers.  Nonetheless, Maine has begun to move in a different direction and hopefully one that will result in improvements in the quality of life for our residents.

There remains the problems of lack of opportunity for our young people, a relatively low average household income compared to many other states, growing drug abuse, government overspending, and a host of other issues that impede continued improvement.  The Red Sea has yet to part.

Still, positive signs are appearing.  If Maine citizens can take with a grain of salt the vociferous harangues promulgated by a tiny minority through the “letters to the editor” section of the local newspapers and the obvious reluctance of other media to circulate anything positive about the new Governor’s efforts and allow time for results to appear, then the mood of the State can change and along with it our future.

Plenty of time left to judge Gov. Paul LePage on the results of his policies.

The President Fails Again

His address was proffered under the guise of a serious policy statement covering runaway spending and the budget problems.

Actually, one could simply replay all of the speeches from the first Obama Presidential Campaign and simply skip the boring renditions from the ragged, thumbworn pages of the Democratic political playbook – or, like Vice President Joe Biden, use the time for a restorative nap.

There was certainly nothing new, or even a half-hearted attempt to deal with America’s financial woes in Obama’s recent offering of stale rhetoric, “It’s Bush’s fault”, empty promises and ridiculous “Republicans want to kill poor people, children, the elderly and anyone else in need while providing astronomical tax breaks for the wealthy” divisive accusations.

Then again, what else does Democratic leadership have to offer, other than a hysterical defense of the status quo, in the face of Rep. Paul Ryan’s detailed plan to guide our country back to the stability of financial responsibility?  Once more the empty suite that inhabits the White House has nimbly avoided any responsible action, providing only nebulous statements to “save 4 trillion dollars over the next ten years” through such cost-cutting actions as reducing defense spending and certain Medicare expenses while raising taxes “for the rich”, leaving worrisome details in the hands of the architects (such as Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi) of binge spending that has increased the deficit by $3.1 trillion in just two years.

Indeed, the nation was treated to vintage Obama as the President launched himself into full campaign mode while depending upon the same empty promises that enchanted enough of the gullible and the guilt-ridden to furnish him with the opportunity to remake America into the country that he wants it to be.

And therein is hidden the true goal of the first President who is committed to destroying the country that he swore to lead and protect.  Make no mistake: Barack Obama’s model for America is based on Western Europe.  His vision requires that government assumes the dominant role in American life, redistributing the nation’s wealth to “the needy” (including, of course the necessary government overseers) through crushing taxes on “the rich” (meaning anyone successful enough to not be dependent upon government largess) and borrowing incessantly until our economic structure collapses, opening the door for a succession of “5-year plans” that will finally give the Marxists their longed-for conquest over our free-market system.

Republican Paul Ryan’s budget plan, with the intent of providing a means to restrain the growth of government, is undeniably the roadblock that must be overcome and the Democrats will spare no falsehoods, leave no deprecation unused, no derisive label overlooked, to diminish the potential of returning America to the prominence it has enjoyed over most of the 20th century.

The detestable Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) made his party’s intent crystal clear when briefing reporters about the recent ongoing budget battle, advising his colleagues to label the Republican proposals as radical.  “I always use the word extreme“, he said, “That’s what the caucus instructed me to use this week.”  Is it not perfectly clear by now that Democratic leadership’s only goal is to regain complete control over the country and to hell with the needs of the public?

Rep. Ryan’s plan provides a rich landscape of details designed to set our nation’s financial house in order.  Ryan proposes to have the federal government spend $5.8 trillion less over the next decade than it would under current law, thereby reducing accumulated deficits by more than $4 trillion over the next decade, with the goal of eventually not only balancing the budget but beginning to pay off the principal on the national debt.  This would be accomplished by reducing domestic discretionary spending, reforming the tax code with the intent of broadening the base while lowering rates, block-granting some federal welfare programs to the states, repealing Obamacare, privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, cutting back farm subsidies and corporate welfare, and reforming Medicare for those younger than 55 from an open-ended entitlement into a system of premium supports to subsidize the purchase of private insurance.  The Democrats, naturally, have immediate characterized this last proposal as a “plan to kill old people” even though it has no effect on those currently receiving benefits.

The important thing to recognize is that the Republicans have actually made concrete proposals to deal with the problems that overspending and unlimited borrowing have visited upon our economy, while in his “budget” speech, Obama offered no details to support his “vision” -  nor did he have anything to say about “creating jobs” after the past week’s new unemployment figures surged once again to over the 400,000 mark for new filings.

His address was political rhetoric, laced with demagoguery and obfuscation.  What else is to be  expected from a figurehead of the Left who has avoided any semblance of leadership during the disastrous first half of his Presidency?

The Fallout From “Cronyism Politics”

This past week Maine joined the growing number of states being targeted by demonstrators connected to Moveon.org, labor unions and other organizations that depend upon government largess for their livelihood.

The common link between all of these state governments is an attempt by newly elected Governors and Legislatures to deal with decades of runaway state spending and massive debts incurred through previous administrations’ negligence in funding generous pensions and other benefits.  For decades, state legislatures dominated by Democrats won the loyalty and votes of state workers, welfare recipients and members of the “helping professions” through the unlimited expansion of salaries, pensions and other benefits.

Now, there are only five states throughout the country that are not saddled with massive and unsustainable debt as a result of the failure of lawmakers to adequately fund the promises made in the areas of pension and health care benefits.

Here in Maine, thirty-five years of Democratic control of the legislative branch resulted in an inflated and unwieldy bureaucracy whose number of state workers is 12% above the national average.  In a state where unemployment is rampant, the burden of taxation to support all of these workers is not only hugely burdensome but counterproductive in that coupled with Maine’s unfriendly business climate, Maine citizens are rapidly approaching the point where there will be more people “riding in the wagon than pulling it”.

New Governor Paul LePage has proposed modest increases in State workers’ contributions to pension and health care benefits (which workers’ costs are already far below the norm borne by private sector employees), that have been met with hysterical protests by a few demonstrators and their handlers “from away”.  The Governor’s statement that job cuts will be limited to a dozen or so positions and a few jobs that are currently not filled was also targeted with panicked remonstrations that the sky was in dire danger of falling if these “assaults” were allowed to be carried out.

I watched with irritation a film clip of a relatively young retired state worker who was bemoaning the proposal that her pension (which was close to my military retirement figure) faced limitations in cost-of-living increases.  Since this is the second year in a row that I have been denied any such increase I was unable to sympathize – Social Security recipients, by the way, are facing the same denial.  I fail to see why state workers in any jurisdiction should be granted favored status over those who are required to pay for their “services”.

I do not maintain that police, firemen, EMT’s and other vital professions are overpaid. As a twenty-year military veteran, I can certainly appreciate the dangerous environment in which they work and the tolls that such jobs exact on both physical and mental well-being.  In the case of retired military, we were severely underpaid during active service with the promise that we would be paid a certain percentage of that monthly stipend for the rest of our lives (if we made it past the twenty-year mark).  For other, less demanding professions ….. well, $80,000 plus for nine months on the job for a Wisconsin teacher seems quite generous.

My “free treatment for life” medical benefits have been altered to include both a monthly charge and co-payments, but I still consider myself lucky to have some help in that area.

Government at all levels is fraught with waste and redundancy.  The protest that budgets “have been cut to the bone” is both spurious and laughable.  Worse still is the contention that government workers at any level should have a special exemption when it comes to the belt-tightening that must be accepted by all of us citizens to save America from financial and social ruin.

What we are witnessing is an orgy of self-interest and entitlement from the public service sector.  And it is all directly connected to decades of failure by elected officials to serve the best interests of the American public.  Instead, we are trying to deal with the fallout produced by a climate of corruption and cronyism engineered by the foxes who have guaranteed the welfare of selected residents of the chicken coop in return for a quota of vociferous clucking on demand.

Health Care Can Be Reformed

The knee jerk mantra from the Left has been that Obamacare is sacrosanct and anyway, the opposition (meaning Republicans) has failed to come up with any alternative suggestions.  This is prevarication and obfuscation at its worst.  In 2009, House Republicans offered a plan to improve health care and lower the costs which was rejected out of hand by Obama and his advisers and mostly ignored by the mainstream press.

The result is Obamacare, which has been roundly repudiated by the American public, both in the polls and by the November elections.  Mr. Jeffrey H. Anderson, in the February 14th edition of The Weekly Standard, provides a illuminating explanation of why the American people have proved unwilling to accept Obamacare as a permanent fixture of American life:

“If an architect gives you a horrible plan for a house you didn’t ask for, can’t afford, and don’t want to live in, you don’t work with the architect to change the color of the paint or modify the placement of a closet – especially when the foundation hasn’t yet been poured.  Rather, you fire the architect and get to work on replacement plans for something far more livable and affordable.”

Our system does not allow us to fire the architects of Obamacare on the spot, although a significant number of their supporters were nudged out of their comfy nests following the November elections.  The House Republicans did construct an pass  a bill repealing the forced legislation, even though it was understood that the Senate would never go along with such action, nor would President Obama sign off on it.

So now the Republican majorities need to redouble their efforts provide America with a choice of meaningful, sensible alternatives to Obamacare’s  most grievous and comprehensive failings and thoroughly publicize their efforts.

Mr. Anderson suggests that Republicans concentrate on and emphasize three “relatively simple things”.

First: lowering health costs.  A health care plan released by House Republicans (and ignored by the Administration and the mainstream media) already provides a viable framework by allowing “Americans to buy health insurance across state lines”, allowing “small business to pool together to buy insurance”, allowing “private entities greater latitude in following the Safeway cost-cutting model of offering lower premiums for healthier lifestyles”, preventing “runaway malpractice lawsuits, which lead doctors to practice defensive medicine and thereby substantially raise health care cost for everyone, and “make it easier to use pre-tax Health Savings Accounts”.  Mr. Anderson reports that the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the 2009 Republican plan would lower premiums by 5 percent to 8 percent on the open market while Obamacare would raise them by 10 to 13 percent.

Second: stopping the tax code from discriminating against the uninsured.  The important thing here is to understand that the “discrimination” involved is not that insurance companies charge more for people who incur more costs – that is simply a business procedure – but that the tax code offers tax breaks to those who obtain health care through their employer’s plans (pre-tax contributions, etc.) that are not available to those who try to purchase policies on the open market using after-tax dollars, thereby forcing them to pay rates that are much higher than anyone else’s.  Refundable tax credits to the uninsured while not changing the tax status of employer-provided insurance would be one option to pursue

Third: providing sensibly structured federally funded, state-run community “high-risk pools”.  The Obamacare plan that everyone would be force insurers into covering all comers at the same price (which is not scheduled to go into effect for three years) would simply guarantee a higher premium for all in addition to being overregulated, underfunded, and mandating overly expensive benefits.  The pools should be intended for people who are “high cost” rather than “high risk” and would benefit from an overhaul with better design, lower cost, and less regulation with more local control as goals.

This, in a nutshell, describes Mr. Anderson’s advice to Republicans.  It could be noted that many of his suggestions and comments are addressed in the 2009 Republican plan.  That could be an excellent starting place for bi-partisan collaboration in structuring a replacement bill that would provide improvements in the costs and administration of American health care.

We will soon see if our elected politicians are up to the task.

Wouldn’t it be nice if the mainstream media played a helpful and informative part?

 

Where Should Priorities Lie?

America’s government entities, state and federal, are faced with a host of problems.  Taken as a whole, this mountainous stack of items that need fixing can easily appear insurmountable.  But for those of us outside of government (accustomed to dealing with the real world, if you will), such challenges are not necessarily the unbeatable troll that lives under the bridge or the unstoppable ogre who is bent on dismantling the castle and devouring its inhabitants.

An old saying is truly applicable; “If you find yourself in a deep and seemingly inescapable hole, the first thing to do is stop digging”.  Alas, if only all of our government officials would heed that pithy advice.

No matter what the circumstances, there are always choices involved.  Perhaps they may all appear to be choices with unpleasant consequences, leaving the searcher with only varying degrees of discomfort available to choose from – or, in the case of terminal disease or injury, only one eventual scenario.  In many instances, however, pre-disaster choices (stop smoking, don’t walk on busy train tracks, avoid traveling during blizzards, STOP UNFUNDED SPENDING) can set up a more propitious outcome.

As individuals, the choices that we make can have an enormous impact on our lives.  In working out our daily problems and conflicts, we often employ the technique of prioritization, thus selecting the most important current issue or issues to address in hopes of maintaining at least some semblance of equanimity.

Governments, being a lodestone for politicians and bureaucrats, are by nature ill-equipped to make decisions without endless study and discussion (unless, of course, the decision has to do with their personal welfare and/or prestige, or payoffs to those who helped them gain admission to the Ruling Class).  A case in point is the existence of over 1,000 “commissions”, funded at a cost of over $400 million, that have been appointed to provide “guidance” to government entities who have already been staffed (at great expense) with those who have been selected because of their perceived ability to make appropriate decisions.  Makes your head hurt, doesn’t it?

But such excesses blow a huge hole in the argument that no programs or funding can be cut or reduced without destroying our nation.

An argument can be made that our most pressing national and local problems revolve around the economy and a supposed lack of money available to work our way out of the swamp of overspending that impedes economic recovery.  As anyone (politicians and bureaucrats excepted) who has despairingly struggled with the family budget has come to realize, you cannot spend your way out of debt.  Stop digging, if you are searching for solutions.  In America’s case, the production of rights and benefits is at the tipping point of overcoming the production of wealth.

Keep in mind that government does not create wealth – it taxes the producers of wealth (be they business owners or the workers they employ) and redistributes the proceeds ……. after feeding the government machine, of course.

For example: Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are rightfully praised as safety net programs for aging or otherwise destitute citizens.  These programs are regarded as imperative.  Fine, but just suppose that limits/priorities were applied.  Suppose that monthly Social Security payments were frozen for a defined period.  Suppose that means testing was applied and payments were further adjusted.  Suppose that such entitlements were reserved (prioritized) for only citizens or immigrants with legal status (green cards).  Would you anticipate any savings?

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”.  Now there is a good example of establishing priorities.

How to achieve those goals is why we have elections as part of the process of continuing our Representative Republic.  “We the People” …. not, “We the Government”, or “We the Bureaucrats”, or “We the Town Council”, or “We the Politicians”, and certainly not “We the Citizens of Other Countries Who have Entered America Illegally”.

We the People must hold our elected representatives accountable for their promises and to living up to their oaths of office.  We must insist that they stop digging the hole of astronomical debt deeper and deeper.  We must insist that they apply the concept of prioritization.  I know from personal experience how frustrating it can be to send letter after letter, email after email to elected politicians who continue with “business as usual”, but repetitive demands are vital in gaining the attention of the managerially challenged.

So, unless we make it a priority to continually prod these miscreants into improving the lot of the citizenry at large – and not their own personal and/or ideological interests, improvement will remain beyond reach.

Stay alert, stay interested, stay informed, stay active.  Consider making those actions part of your priorities.

 

America’s “Greediest Generation”

Former Senator (1979-1997) Alan Simpson (R-Wyoming) seems to have made perfectly clear his feelings about America’s “entitlement programs”.  In a recent interview printed in the Casper (Wyoming) Star-Tribune, Simpson, co-chair of Barrack Obama’s National Committee on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, leaped to label critics of his decades-long crusade against Social Security as members of the nation’s “Greediest Generation”.

“We had the greatest generation,” Simpson said. “I think this is the greediest generation.”

This from a career politician who inherited his exalted status from his career politician father and who has made a living from the public sector for nearly all of his adult life, who has been involved in advisory commission after advisory commission for over a decade after retiring from the Senate with an exorbitant pension, and who was the recent recipient of a $70,000 knee replacement (courtesy of the taxpayers who pick up the tab for the medical plan for present and former legislators that provides the Cadillac of all plans for them and their families).

What a perfect example of the Ruling Class that we, as voters, have allowed to develop.  I’m a bit surprised that he didn’t add, “Let them eat cake”.

Okay; in the spirit of full disclosure, I am one of the geezers who is eligible for Medicare.  And I also am a retired Army noncom with a modest monthly pension and a medical plan for which I make monthly payments and additional co-payments whenever I utilize the plan (not exactly in line with the “free medical care for life” that military retirees were promised, but so much for government promises).

After leaving the military, I continued to work until reaching the age of full eligibility for these benefits.  During my entire working life including military service, I continued to pay into both Social Security and Medicare.  That was the contract that was proffered to working Americans – you pay into the system during the time that you are most productive to help support those who no longer are able to completely support themselves and then you become eligible for some benefits.  To me, that is not an “entitlement”; it is the return on an investment.  Unfortunately, these programs have been expanded to include many who have contributed very little, if anything during their lifetimes to funding the costs and the money that has been collected has been looted by successive administrations to pay for overspending in other areas.

It is most telling that this “commission” has focused on these programs rather than coming up with inclusive, across-the-boards reductions in government spending.

And now some preening jackass who has avoided productive work for most of his life is freely doling out insults?

This is one of the incompetents who helped engineer the redirection of the funds that were meant to support Social Security and Medicare into other areas of government spending, leaving current and projected deficits that threaten the programs.

It is, of course, the “wisdom” of Obama to stock a commission of this type with the political hacks who contributed to the problem.  It is Washington’s usual solution any spending problem – recommend cuts to the most visible and important programs, hoping to manufacture enough public outrage to divert any attempts to impose fiscal responsibility on a government whose spending is out of control.  Compiling earmarks, payoffs to favored constituents, growth of government jobs (patronage) and innumerable other schemes to ensure their reelection is, of course, immune from cuts.

Hey, for the second year in a row there is to be no cost of living increase for either Social Security recipients or military retirees.  The same cannot be said for government workers and politicians.

Do we need to rein in spending?  Yup.  But let’s take an inclusive approach, designed after careful and thorough review by legislative committees and ignoring the “solutions” dished out presidential appointees.  At least, those who make the decisions would be held responsible to the voters.

 

 

 

Government and Your Money

During the past week, we have been treated to a clear view of what life would be like under the Democratic Party were it not for the past election.  This amazing demonstration was “highlighted” by a blatant attempt by Harry Reid and company to once again ram through an enormous Omnibus Bill (over 1,900 pages) that contained utterly outrageous expenditures in the form of nearly 7,000 earmarks designed to shovel out rewards for favored constituencies.  Worse still, there were some Republicans who had sponsored some of these earmarks and initially seemed ready to provide support for the obscenity’s passage.

Fortunately, an outpouring of public rage and disgust over this last-minute attempt to engineer an increase in the national debt of over one trillion dollars sidelined and eventually required the withdrawal of the bill.  As many have complained, the election results were initially ignored by the Ruling Elite and their arrogance and denial were on full display.  Anyone associated with sponsorship of this travesty should be clearly exposed, duly noted, and removed from office at the earliest opportunity.

Throughout the week, which also featured the extension of the current tax rates (frequently referred to as “the Bush tax cuts”), many of the left and their tame “economists” engaged in prolonged and vociferous caterwauling over the lack of funds to support this “break for the rich”.  Come on – get real.

In 2010, according to a report by the Heritage Foundation, 43 major new regulations were imposed on America at a total cost topping $26.5 billion, far more than for any other year for which records are available.  But that was just for new rules.  A study by economist Mark Crain revealed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute estimates that “annual regulatory compliance costs hit $1.187 trillion in 2009…Regulatory costs are equivalent to 63 percent of all 2007 corporate pretax profits of $1.89 trillion…Regulatory costs exceed estimated 2009 individual income taxes of $953 billion by 25 percent”.

Not to mention the “Porkulous Bill” that shoveled nearly a trillion dollars into the eager maws of unions and government entities at all levels, and the obscenely expensive and already ineffective Obamacare debacle, nor the fact that Congressional operating expenses have more than doubled in less than a decade.

Yes, Social Security and Medicare need reform.  Warren Buffet, George Soros, and other assorted billionaires and millionaires don’t need to be eligible to draw money from accounts originally set up to aid an aging and needy American public.  But these programs, along with Defense spending, should not be the prime targets for cuts.  Not while Democratic suckups such as unions, “helping” organizations such as ACORN and other “community organizers”, and innumerable other administration-favored special interests receive taxpayer funding by the truckload.

Earmarks and other forms of pork should be immediately barred, as has been proposed by the more thoughtful and ethical members of Congress.  It is far past time for a thorough review of government spending at all levels.  The people of America have been “sucking it up” for some time now.  Let’s make sure that sacrifices are not limited to the public.  Get behind the concepts of limited government and fiscal responsibility and let your elected representatives know in no uncertain terms that their gravy train is about to be derailed.

I don’t know about you, but I am sick and tired of this “there isn’t any money” routine.  There is plenty of money available.  What is lacking is the desire and will on the part of many those we have chosen to make important decisions on our behalf.

November has proven that we don’t have to put up with the greed, corruption and obfuscation that has taken over Washington.  The fight has only just begun.

What Will it Take?

The elections have been over for almost a month.  New members of Congress have been sworn in.  By now the message from the American people that “business as usual” is no longer going to be tolerated should have sunk in.

So what do we have?

A group of Progressive ideologues (Democrats) determined to use a lame-duck Congress to impose as many of their rejected attempts to strangle America’s recovery as they can possibly cram into this last desperate Congressional session before they have to relinquish their four-year long control of U.S. government.

Delay, delay, delay.  Multiple problems still face the nation and this group of fanatics still insist on “our way or nothing”.  Steps could be taken to begin to alleviate our economic woes and yet the Democrats are insisting on implementing new programs that will only exacerbate the effects of their failed policies.

In all seriousness, what has Democratic leadership done to make things better?  Unemployment continues to rise (9.8% as of today), the dollar’s international value is still declining, businesses are still in limbo because they have no clue as to what havoc taxes may wreak on their endeavors with the beginning of the new year, prices of food and petroleum products have just shown a substantial increase ….. the list goes on and on.

Agreement over how to address the most pressing issues is stalled.  There is hope that this may change after a new Congress is sworn in, but that too far away to wait for.  One hopes that the message of discontent revealed in the election results would have resulted in a realization by our elected representatives that the public in general is not content with the way that they have been handling the nation’s problems.  Immediate positive action on the part of politicians would help to restore some of the lost confidence in our government.

It is not as if there were no solutions at hand.  A pertinent example is a recent proposal released by Democrat Alice Rivlin (former budget director under Bill Clinton) and Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin that addresses our exploding health care entitlements.  Highlights of their proposal would not affect the benefits of current and near-retirees untouched.  But for those now 55 and younger, Rivlin and Ryan describe a shift from Medicare’s direct payment for care in an open-ended way to an opportunity for retirees to utilize government funding to purchase health insurance on their own.  The amount would be based on “average annual per capita expenditures in 2021″ and subject adjustment by income, geography and health risks so that those who need increased aid can get it.

Such a sensible, controlled approach would be aimed at cost-containment, allowing individuals more control over their coverage and care, and giving states more control over their budgets by transforming the federal share of the Medicaid program into block grants to each state.  And, most importantly, the program’s details would result in a reduction of health care costs.  Contrast this to Obama’s pork-laden, government-heavy, tremendously expensive ideologically based disaster.

As it is, Congress cannot currently manage to construct a coherent agreement to deal with the looming expiration of the current tax breaks and the impending huge tax increase that will affect all citizens.  Headlines these days feature the argument over extending unemployment benefits for those who have already been supported by the tax payers for two years.  Hey, there is work available.  I know families here in Maine who are working two and three jobs to put food on the table.  Ideal?  Hardly.  But they are survivors.

The American people are demanding change …… substantive changes, not the empty promises of Obama that were employed to mask his plans to nudge our country under the camouflaged netting of the overweening Socialist state.

Put the pressure on your local representatives.  Tell them to do the job that they were elected to do or be prepared to leave town and try to make a living out of the wreckage that they have created.